An Empirical Analysis Of Matching Behavior In Drug Trafficking Cases

The dangers of drugs are obvious to all.In the world,drug crime is a serious crime in most countries（regions）.Drug trafficking is one of the most harmful and influential drug crimes.Drug trafficking and trafficking mostly come from matching,and drug trafficking cases are numerous.Therefore,the author tries to analyze this behavior and try to define it as a "matching" drug trafficking case.The first part of this article focuses on the main concepts of "matching" drug trafficking cases,which mainly includes two types of cases,namely,intermediary drug trafficking and drug purchase.However,the middle selling of drugs belongs to the general drug crime,and the criminals do not have the obvious matching characteristics.At the same time,the first part also makes a further comparison and analysis of the similarities and differences between the types of drug trafficking cases.The second part of this article focuses on clarifying the various normative documents of drug-related crimes in recent years.While analyzing and comparing these normative documents,it also makes some explanations on the dilemma in judicial practice.For example,the intermediary has experienced a process from strict to lenient,from extensive "one-size-fits-all" to concrete analysis of specific problems.Generally speaking,the act of introducing and selling drugs by drug purchasers for the purpose of taking drugs does not violate the current criminal law,and other acts of introducing drugs by intermediaries are regarded as accomplices of corresponding crimes by the acts they help.For example,in the case of drug-buying crime,according to the existing judicial interpretation,"for profit-making purposes" has become an important condition for the crime of drug-buying on behalf of the purchaser.Its important argument is that the purchaser is equivalent to a tool of the drug-purchasing personnel,and the purchaser’s hand is equivalent to that of the drug-purchasing personnel.Crime,if purchasing agents do not aim at making profits,they can not be convicted and sentencing.I can’t agree with this view.The act of buying on behalf of drug addicts can’t be completely equal to the act of buying drugs by themselves.The third part of this article aims to demonstrate the unfinished problems in the form of case analysis,such as the crime of intermediary drug trafficking,the actor actively participate in the actual transaction of drugs,whether it may constitute the crime of drug trafficking? For example,how to analyze the specific problems of drug abuse behavior in purchasing drugs crime? Also like many times for others from the same drug on behalf of the purchase of drugs,can be identified as helping drugs on the household drug sales? Which is regarded as the crime of drug trafficking? New problems emerging in practice bring different standpoints to collide.The fourth part of this article makes a brief reference and explanation to some important countries and regions at home and abroad.The core elements of the argument are to discuss whether it is necessary to establish separate charges for intermediary drug trafficking,and the feasibility of criminalizing the act of buying drugs on behalf of others.After all,it is not a long-term plan to provide referee guidance for a criminal act in the form of "minutes of meetings" and provincial regulations.In the face of the defendant’s defense that "the law does not expressly stipulate not to be guilty",the prosecution’s charges are ultimately insufficient.In a word,the author holds that,in the face of more and more surrogate purchase and intermediary introduction in judicial practice,and based on the extremely similar characteristics of these two acts,it is necessary to make a deep comparison and discuss in detail the boundaries between the offence and the offence,so as to clarify the various problems in the judicial practice of drug trafficking cases.